In the interest of sparking a good debate during this slow season...

[den-the-coach]

Defense wins championships. And teams with poor defenses don't win either.

.

Not true anymore....New England's defense has been sub par at best and they've won plenty. Also last season the Eagles had a very good defense, one of the top in the NFL, but it was the offense that won their championship. I would agree in one area like the Denver Broncos had a few years ago, but it's best now to have a balance, where both sides can win you a game and the special teams don't lose you a game like it did last year for the Rams against the Falcons.

 

[nighttrain]

Your using Fisher as the example here. Not a fair argument. But, the Ravens won a Superbowl with Trent Dilfer. Defense wins championships. And teams with poor defenses don't win either.


/QUOTE]

Rule changes have made it so a a Trent Dilfer type QB will never again win, or play in a SB
train

 

[ausmurp]

Gurley is not even close. And please let's stop calling Donald an interior DL, he is a DL and can literally play all DL positions and if he were a 34 OLB he'd prob be the best there too. Donald is a top 5 player (offense or defense) in the NFL. He's better than Gurley. Gurley would need to repeat what he did last year over and over again to be considered just as good as Leveon Bell. He's no Faulk he's 3-4 yrs away of consistency to be in that boat. Hes not even in Steven Jackson territory yet.

All that being said, an elite offense wins championships consistently now if the D can just be good. That's the blueprint. So I keep Gurley over Donald as he's cheaper and a key part of our elite O. If I were the Rams I would trade Donald for maybe a combination of 2 really good D players or one good one and some draft capital.

 

[ausmurp]

@Elmgrovegnome defenses 'steal' a SB here and there but elite offenses consistently win them. I would rather have multiple SBs than just one. Defense does not consistently win championships. Offense does.

 

[nighttrain]

@Elmgrovegnome defenses 'steal' a SB here and there but elite offenses consistently win them. I would rather have multiple SBs than just one. Defense does not consistently win championships. Offense does.

this is what i see happening
train

 

[dieterbrock]

Reading thru this thread makes me feel like its really asking, if you could only sign 2 out of Donald, Gurley and Goff, which 2 would you sign?

 

[nighttrain]

Reading thru this thread makes me feel like its really asking, if you could only sign 2 out of Donald, Gurley and Goff, which 2 would you sign?

Goff and Gurley, just the way it is
train

 

[Ken]

Reading thru this thread makes me feel like its really asking, if you could only sign 2 out of Donald, Gurley and Goff, which 2 would you sign?

Goff and AD (assuming Goff keeps ascending as a QB).

 

[shovelpass]

Goff and AD (assuming Goff keeps ascending as a QB).

Even at this stage I'd say keep Goff. He played great last season, his level of play is enough to win games and passing on him for someone else is either a big gamble or a big investment cap wise. I'd gladly take 5+ years of Goff over the revolving door of "starting" QBs we've had to endure prior last season.

 

[Akrasian]

Goff is the one to keep. It's a QB's league. Between Donald and Gurley, it would depend on the salaries it requires to keep them, and what can be obtained in trade. Other things being equal, I would keep Donald - he is probably the best player in the league at the moment, but a DT.

Gurley has two more years of being relatively cheap. Then at some point during his next contract, he will likely suffer the typical early RB decline. It's the nature of the position, with many hundreds of hits each season. Frankly, I would probably franchise him after year 5 with the non-exclusive tag, and see what offers he gets, and either get 2 firsts, or work out a trade, or if the salary he's offered is not that outrageous, then sign him.

 

[LesBaker]

Reading thru this thread makes me feel like its really asking, if you could only sign 2 out of Donald, Gurley and Goff, which 2 would you sign?

Goff and Gurley, just the way it is

Another vote for Goff and Gurley here too.

 

[Elmgrovegnome]

@Elmgrovegnome defenses 'steal' a SB here and there but elite offenses consistently win them. I would rather have multiple SBs than just one. Defense does not consistently win championships. Offense does.

It would appear that way, but it is mainly because the rules favor offense over defense and there aren't as many really great defenses lately. Two of them were playoff favorites, in Minnesota and Philadelphia. Denver's elite defense from a few years ago was a huge reason for that team's success. Philly and Minnesota had great defenses last year, so I am not sure what you mean. Either could have made it to the Superbowl. Atlanta had a good defense as well.

Defenses don't tend to shut teams down like they used to. The league doesn't want 14-3 scores. Offenses are the league's favorite pets right now. QBs get the ball out faster than ever and it makes a few 3 and outs more precious than ever. Good defenses are more important than ever because the offenses are so prolific.

 

[Elmgrovegnome]

Rule changes have made it so a a Trent Dilfer type QB will never again win, or play in a SB
train

Maybe so but if you think defense is no longer important then why did the Rams just spend all their efforts improving theirs?

this is what i see happening
train

Defense is just as important as it always was . The two best defenses last year were vying to represent the NFC in the Superbowl. It wasn't a weird coincidence. Maybe we won't see another 86 Bears team, or a Rey Lewis Ravens team again but it is only because the rules favor the offense and that is how the league likes it. Neither of those defenses would do as well if they played next year. Jacksonville also had a great defense last year. It's just a different league now, but if the defense can't give you more chances than your opponent, then there is no way to keep up. Decent offenses will score points no matter what defense they play.

 

[Elmgrovegnome]

Not true anymore....New England's defense has been sub par at best and they've won plenty. Also last season the Eagles had a very good defense, one of the top in the NFL, but it was the offense that won their championship. I would agree in one area like the Denver Broncos had a few years ago, but it's best now to have a balance, where both sides can win you a game and the special teams don't lose you a game like it did last year for the Rams against the Falcons.

LOL. Not true? Then why did Snead acquire Talib, Peters, Shields, and Suh? I guess teams should just not play defense anymore. Minnesota had a very good defense and so did the Eagles and Jags. New England is just different. They have a different strategy and they outlast teams. Belichick works his players like harder than other teams and they consistently play stronger in the second half than their opponents. It's their strategy and it works. They always finish strong and win a lot of close games late. Plus the churn the roster to try and stay younger. New England trades aging stars, and let's older free agents go. If an older player can't take all the sprinting then he isn't going to cut it. Coincidentally New England doesn't even use elite running backs, like Gurley and AP. They win without them.

Yes, offense is king right now, but only because the league thinks it sells and wants exciting high scoring games. Plus safety issues brought about rules that hinder the physical punishment defenses put on offenses. Throw in that most QBs are getting rid of the ball in 3 seconds or less and the defenses have an even tougher job. But the defense is as just as important as ever. Their job is a lot harder than it ever was too. With so many high scoring games, getting more defensive stops and turnovers is usually how good teams win, i.e. Vikings, Eagles, Jaguars, and hopefully the Rams next year. Isn't it odd that the three best defenses were so successful last year?

 

[Bayrams]

I would rather lose AD to free agency than Goff or Gurley.

 

[dieterbrock]

I would rather lose AD to free agency than Goff or Gurley.

Just my .02, but if you have a franchise QB, you don't need a franchise RB too.
Hope we can keep all 3, but IMO if we can only hang on to 2, I would hope its Donald 1, and Goff 2....

 

[ausmurp]

Just my .02, but if you have a franchise QB, you don't need a franchise RB too.
Hope we can keep all 3, but IMO if we can only hang on to 2, I would hope its Donald 1, and Goff 2....

Anyone not putting Goff first is assinign. We finally land a franchise QB and you really, honestly think we should

It would appear that way, but it is mainly because the rules favor offense over defense and there aren't as many really great defenses lately. Two of them were playoff favorites, in Minnesota and Philadelphia. Denver's elite defense from a few years ago was a huge reason for that team's success. Philly and Minnesota had great defenses last year, so I am not sure what you mean. Either could have made it to the Superbowl. Atlanta had a good defense as well.

Defenses don't tend to shut teams down like they used to. The league doesn't want 14-3 scores. Offenses are the league's favorite pets right now. QBs get the ball out faster than ever and it makes a few 3 and outs more precious than ever. Good defenses are more important than ever because the offenses are so prolific.

The rules are never going to change in the defenses favor. And most of the teams who have won in the last 20 yrs have good offense, and good defense. But a good offense can make a defense good a lot easier than defense making offense good. Scoring forces the opposition in ways the defense can take advantage of. All I'm saying is the last 20 yrs have proven an offensive team has a better chace at consistent success than the verse.

 

[ausmurp]

LOL. Not true? Then why did Snead acquire Talib, Peters, Shields, and Suh? I guess teams should just not play defense anymore. Minnesota had a very good defense and so did the Eagles and Jags. New England is just different. They have a different strategy and they outlast teams. Belichick works his players like harder than other teams and they consistently play stronger in the second half than their opponents. It's their strategy and it works. They always finish strong and win a lot of close games late. Plus the churn the roster to try and stay younger. New England trades aging stars, and let's older free agents go. If an older player can't take all the sprinting then he isn't going to cut it. Coincidentally New England doesn't even use elite running backs, like Gurley and AP. They win without them.

Yes, offense is king right now, but only because the league thinks it sells and wants exciting high scoring games. Plus safety issues brought about rules that hinder the physical punishment defenses put on offenses. Throw in that most QBs are getting rid of the ball in 3 seconds or less and the defenses have an even tougher job. But the defense is as just as important as ever. Their job is a lot harder than it ever was too. With so many high scoring games, getting more defensive stops and turnovers is usually how good teams win, i.e. Vikings, Eagles, Jaguars, and hopefully the Rams next year. Isn't it odd that the three best defenses were so successful last year?

Because we are there on offense, we are top 10. D needs to be top 15 and we will be damn near unstoppable. Just a solid balanced D with elite O can win now for us. Love this thread great topic.

I would think the debate should've died though when we replaced a good defensive mind with a great offense mind at HC..

 

[LACHAMP46]

Rule changes have made it so a a Trent Dilfer type QB will never again win, or play in a SB

Denver team....when Peyton just dropped off the map...shows dominant defense still wins....

Hell, the Jags played that way...and all of a sudden Blake Bortles turned into...a legitimate QB....all of a sudden.....first playoffs too....


On another note...

Elite, franchise QB's....win playoff games at home....AT HOME!!!!! And play well in the process.

 

[Elmgrovegnome]

Because we are there on offense, we are top 10. D needs to be top 15 and we will be damn near unstoppable. Just a solid balanced D with elite O can win now for us. Love this thread great topic.

I would think the debate should've died though when we replaced a good defensive mind with a great offense mind at HC..

I hope they figure out how to keep Donald. I prefer both a top ten Offense and defense. Minnesota had both last year and still didn't make it to the Superbowl. The team should be as good as possible on both sides. I disagree that it's okay for the defense to be mediocre just because you have a good offense. You just described last year's Saints team and they weren't too impressive against the Rams. They had a good game in the playoffs against Minnesota, but their QB is a future HoFer. Goff isn't in the same stratosphere......yet at least.